Analysis: Story on Romney and how numbers are used throughout the text

A story posted on the Fox News webpage about the Democratic tactics to bring down Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romeny uses numbers to merely restate Romeny's actions as well as explain the current standing in the race for the Republication nomination.

This story which ran Sunday first uses numbers by going over some of Romney's past words when he "casually bet a rival $10,000." His tax reports are then merely summarized without using actual numeral data and it is added that he carries bank accounts in other countries. I am not sure how effective this was, I am not sure if the reporter is attempting to make Romney look bad because he is known to have a lot of money or not. We are not told why he made the bet or why he has accounts outside the US. I more so feel that these numbers were added to make an assumption about Romney. No mathmatics were needed for this usage, only double checking of facts.

At the very end of this story the standings for the Republican nominee's are outlined. The paragraph reads as so:

"With about half of the GOP nominating contests complete, Romney has won 54 percent of the delegates at stake, putting him on track to reach the threshold 1,144 national convention delegates in June. Santorum, who has won 27 percent of the delegates at stake, would need to win 74 percent of the remaining delegates to clinch the nomination."

Here the reporter is stating the percentage of delegates the top two Republican nominees hold. He then outlines the runner-up out of the two, Santorum, would need to win a certain percentage of delegates to win the nomination. Knowing the percentages won by the men does not require any mathematical usage, but finding out what Santorum would need to win may have unless the information was gathered elsewhere. I feel that this is easy to understand. In this paragraph the reporter also mentions the threshold of national convention delegates. This listing confuses me slightly. As someone who is not clear on all political terms I feel as if this was worded differently or even explained a little bit more that it would be easier to understand.